Summary

John Brennan's confirmation hearing to be CIA director has adjourned. Here's a summary of where things stand:

•Brennan easily handled all the committee's questions. Several senators asked him to promise to be a transparent CIA director, and never to hide anything from them. He said he needed them to oversee him. It was all very chummy. Brennan will speak to the committee again in a closed hearing Tuesday and in all likelihood will be confirmed shortly thereafter.

•Brennan said he'd changed his assessment of whether the CIA's "enhanced interrogation" program had yielded valuable information. Brennan is on the record as saying "lives were saved." But after reading the summary of the committee's 6,000-page report on the CIA program, he said, he's no longer sure.

• Chairwoman Feinstein opened the hearing by saying that the number of civilians killed in US drone strikes was "in the single digits" each year. She didn't get any argument from Brennan, or from anyone else on the committee. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates that between 475-891 Pakistani civilians have died in US drone strikes since 2004. It wasn't a point of discussion.

• Neither was Brennan pressed on the criteria for adding a terror suspect to the drone kill list, just revealed in a declassified white paper. Sen. Ron Wyden asked why suspects couldn't be offered the opportunity to surrender. Brennan said they forfeited it when they joined al-Qaeda. Wyden asked why couldn't a panel review the kill list. Brennan said it was too urgent and dangerous not to do it alone.

• Warrantless wiretapping? Didn't come up.

11.00pm GMT

Feinstein tells Brennan he'll be a great head of the CIA. She winds the hearing down. There will be a second, closed hearing on Tuesday. She asks Brennan to be prepared to discuss northern Africa, and Mali specifically.

10.58pm GMT

Collins shares the concern of CIA folks she's spoken with that Brennan will be more the president's man in the CIA than the CIA's man in the White House.

"Which John Brennan are they going to get?" she asks.

"The CIA would get a John Brennan who is neither a Democrat or a Republican, nor has ever been.... one who has been fortunate to have lived [the intelligence profession] for 40 years. ...The CIA would get a John Brennan who has been working national intelligence issues for my life."

This answer, with its repeated third-person references, has a rhetorical drumbeat that makes it feel pre-composed, like the peroration in a courtroom drama.

That's the John Brennan you'll get.

10.52pm GMT

Brennan warns about al-Qaida taking hold in Syria. "We cannot allow vast areas to be exploited by al-Qaida... because it will be to our peril," he says.

10.49pm GMT

No better time for a waterboarding joke then when you're questioning the prospective CIA chief. At least that's what Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, thought.

"I'll be brief," Burr said at the start of his second-round question for Brennan. "You're on your fourth glass of water and I don't want to be accused of waterboarding you."

Brennan, who has repeatedly dodged the question of whether waterboarding constitutes torture, did not seem to appreciate the humor.

The joke recalled John McCain's warning that the foreign relations committee would waterboard secretary of state nominee John Kerry to "get the truth out of him."

Torture jokes: they never get old.

10.43pm GMT

Wyden's back up. He asks Brennan whether the president shouldn't provide an individual with the opportunity to surrender before killing him dead with a drone?

Brennan basically says such a person has forfeited his opportunity to surrender.

"In those instances... we have routinely said ...that we're at war with al-Qaida, that al-Qaida is trying to kill American citizens... we have signaled this worldwide....

"Any American who [joined them] should know well that they are part of an enemy against us."

10.39pm GMT

Once again Brennan says that he was once sure that [torture] worked but now he's not sure.

Burr: "I'm still not clear on whether you think the information from CIA interrogation saved lives."

Brennan: "I don't know myself. I'm not clear at this time either. Because I've read a report that calls into question a lot of the information that I was provided."

10.34pm GMT

It's become a downright love-in on Capitol Hill.

Round two for Sen Rockefeller. He begins by saying that Brennan is so far the most patently transparent and plainspoken potential CIA director that he, Rockefeller, has ever encountered.

"I just think you've done an extraordinary job of patience, of courtesy, of wisdom... to me, I think you're a terrific leader, and I'll look forward to [the closed committee hearing] Tuesday, and I think you're the guy for the job, and the only guy for the job," Rockefeller says.

"It's a daunting task," Brennan says. "I want every member of this committee to be an ardent advocate of every member of the Central Intelligence Committee."

Updated at 10.37pm GMT

10.29pm GMT

Feinstein asked Brennan to talk about who Anwar al-Awlaki was, because, she says, when people hear he was an American citizen (New Mexico-born), they might get the idea that he was upstanding.

Feinstein and Brennan go on to discuss Awlaki's ties to al-Qaida, the underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and Ft. Hood shooting suspect Nidal Malik Hasan. The upshot: He was a bad man.

"There are parts of Yemen that are ungoverned and beyond the reach of Yemeni security and intelligence services," Brennan says. Capture wasn't possible, he says.

10.20pm GMT

Angus King, Independent of Maine, is up. He gets into a very interesting exchange with Brennan about executive power and taking US lives by fiat.

First King asks where the CIA ends and the department of defense starts. Currently both the agency and the Pentagon conduct drone strikes.

Brennan says he's looking forward to identifying areas where redundancies can be eliminated.

Then King proposes a "FISA-court type process where an American citizen is going to be targeted for a lethal strike. Having an executive be judge, jury and executioner all in one is very contrary to the traditions. and the laws of this country.... We're depriving American citizens of their life when we target them in drone attacks," King says.

Brennan answers: "Senator, I think it's certainly worthy of discussion. Our tradition... is that a court of law is used to determine one's guilt or innocence for past actions. [but] we take actions so that we protect American lives... that is an executive branch function...

"We have wrestled with this, in terms of whether there can be a FISA-like court, but the actions that we take on the counter-terrorism front... the nature of the threat is so grave and serious, that we have no recourse..."

Tom McCarthy (@TeeMcSee)

King: Shouldn't there be oversight of drone strikes? Brennan: In principle, yes, but in reality it's far too dangerous not to handle alone.

He begins by inviting Brennan to visit his home state. Then he asks the same question Udall asked, which is, will Brennan join a publicity effort to "set the record straight" on the fact that torture did not work.

Brennan agrees in principal to join such an effort.

10.02pm GMT

Collins now asks why the aim of the drone program has changed.

At first the goal was to kill al-Qaida's senior leadership. But now Gen. Stanley McChrystal and others have pointed out that the US hits junior militants and such strikes "are hated on a visceral level even by people who have never seen one" and "add to the perception of an American arrogance that 'we can fly where we want, we can shoot where we want.'"

She says the strikes could create a backlash and create new terrorists. Does Brennan agree?

"I think that is something that we have to be very mindful of, in terms of what the reaction is... whether it's a remotely piloted aircraft or a manned aircraft," Brennan says.

He says by and large, Yemenis don't resent the strikes.

"The people are being held hostage to al-Qaida in these areas... and have welcomed the work ... to rid them of the al-Qaida cancer in their midst."

Updated at 10.03pm GMT

9.59pm GMT

Ask and ye shall receive. Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, is up and she's asking about how the government determines who can be detained and who must be killed.

She says the spike in drone strikes would seem to indicate that there's been a shift in detainee policy

"There's never been an occasion that I'm aware of when we had the opportunity to capture a terrorist and we didn't, in favor of a lethal strike," Brennan says.

He ties the spike in drone strikes to the "growth" of al-Qaida in Yemen.

9.54pm GMT

Didn't we want the white paper and the OLC memo so that we could discuss the administration's rationale for killing US citizens abroad? Remember that whole discussion we were going to have about what constitutes an "imminent threat" when the potential drone target is a jeep passenger in Yemen?

It hasn't come up yet.

Ari Melber (@AriMelber)

Core questions for drone killings are 1) Transparency 2) Legality and 3) Policy Efficacy. This hearing is not tackling most of the issues.

Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, asks Brennan about the suspect in the Benghazi attack who was detained temporarily in Tunisia and then let go. Rubio asks what that was about.

Brennan says Tunisians "work with their rule of law just like we do" and they decided he wasn't to be held.

Rubio: Couldn't we just grab him?

Brennan: "We didn't have anything on him either, because if we did we would have made a point to the Tunisians" that we needed to talk to him.

Rubio is bothered we were unable to question the suspect. Brennan says the US has to be an example to the world in the observance of the rule of law. "I think the United States government has to respect these governments' rights to enforce their laws appropriately."

Updated at 9.48pm GMT

9.39pm GMT

Udall calls for the Intelligence committee's report to be declassified.

Brennan bridles at that, saying it would be "a very weighty decision in terms of declassifying that report."

Brennan has a lot of respect for government secrets.

The Republicans are trying to accuse him of leaking information to the press. The Democrats are asking him to agree to declassification.

His first question is about why CIA officials continue to make inaccurate assertions about the agency's rendition and interrogation program. Meaning: why does the CIA continue to pretend torture worked?

Udall asks for Brennan's commitment to "work publicly to correct the record" on the CIA's black sites program.

Brennan says he wants to wait for the CIA's response to the report, which is supposed to be finished by mid-February, before he signs on for Udall's public awareness initiative.

9.32pm GMT

Mark Udall, Democrat of Colorado, is up.

Earlier this week Udall released a statement saying he was "deeply disappointed" that Brennan "was unprepared to discuss the Intelligence Committee's recent report on the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program" in a private meeting.

9.30pm GMT

There have been surprisingly few instances of Brennan playing the "sorry, that's classified" card so far. He does so now with Dan Coats, Republican of Indiana, who returns to the May 2012 episode in which the White House reportedly disclosed covert ops:

"Senator I must caution that there elements of this event that remain classified," Brennan says.

9.25pm GMT

And this captures well the rich store of good faith in the room:

Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald)

Q: Mr. Brennan, CIA Directors never tell us anything; do you promise to tell us stuff if we vote to confirm you?A. Totally!!

"My impression earlier on was that there was information that was provided that was useful and valuable," Brennan says. The committee report, however, has changed his mind about potential info gained from torture, he says.

Earlier he said he is now unsure what the truth of the matter is.

9.14pm GMT

Sen. Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, has a question for Brennan: Do you consider waterboarding torture?

Brennan's observes that he is not a lawyer – but for all that his answer is quite lawyerly. He says waterboarding would have no place in his CIA:

"The attorney general has referred to waterboarding as torture... many people have referred to it as torture. The term has a lot of legal and political implications. It is something that should have been banned long ago... [if I lead the CIA] it would never be in fact brought back."

But is it torture?

"I am not a lawyer, senator, and I cannot address that question... Waterboarding never should have been used, and never will be if I have anything to do with it," Brennan says.

9.11pm GMT

Sen Barbara Mikulski of Maryland asks Brennan if she can count on him to "speak truth to power."

"Honesty, truthfulness, was a value that was inculcated in me in my home in New Jersey," he says.

9.09pm GMT

No questions so far about warrantless wiretapping or the bad intelligence on Iraq. Mark Udall, we're looking at you.

9.06pm GMT

James Risch, Republican of Idaho, is up. He asks Brennan about a Reuters report that a White House media push in May 2012 had inadvertently revealed a cover operation:

At about 5:45 p.m. EDT on Monday, May 7, just before the evening newscasts, John Brennan, President Barack Obama's top White House adviser on counter-terrorism, held a small, private teleconference to brief former counter-terrorism advisers who have become frequent commentators on TV news shows.

According to five people familiar with the call, Brennan stressed that the plot was never a threat to the U.S. public or air safety because Washington had "inside control" over it.

Brennan's comment appears unintentionally to have helped lead to disclosure of the secret at the heart of a joint U.S.-British-Saudi undercover counter-terrorism operation.

Brennan says he didn't reveal anything. And that given that any plot or non-plot that may or may not have existed would be classified, he can't discuss that.

Agree to disagree?

8.52pm GMT

Wyden says the public has a right to know who the government is killing and why. He asks Brennan how the public will be kept informed.

"I think this hearing is one of the things that can be done... [along with] continued speeches given by the executive branch to explain the counter-terrorism program," Brennan says.

He says there's a misperception that drone strikes are punitive. Nothing could be further from the truth, he says: "such actions as a last resort to save lives, when there's no other alternative."

He says the public doesn't understand "the agony that we go through to make sure that we do not have any collateral injuries or deaths."

"I think the American people will be quite pleased to know we've been quite judicious [in picking drone strikes] and we've only used these as a last resort," he says.

8.48pm GMT

Now Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon is up, the strongest advocate for transparency and civil rights on the committee.

He calls the decision to release the OLC documents last night "encouraging." He calls it a "good first step." "Since last night, however, I have become concerned that the DoJ has not followed through on the president's commitment just yet," he says.

He said he has been unable to read legal opinions attached to the OLC memos. He says it's unfair that legal advisers to congress members are not allowed to read the memos.

"I hope you'll go back to the White House and convey to them that the Justice Department is not following through on the president's commitment," Wyden says.

Brennan says he'll take the message.

8.44pm GMT

Brennan speaks very quickly. He feels a step ahead of every question. The hearing so far feels very comfortable. The senators are perfunctorily setting up a ski course for him to navigate, and he is effortlessly swishing around the gates.

8.41pm GMT

Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, asks Brennan to promise that he will comply with all future committee requests for intelligence documents.

Brennan drops some Government 101. "An impasse between the executive branch and the legislative branch on issues of such importance is not in the national interest," he says. Then he says the separation of powers grants the legislature oversight power.

"They also gave us the power of the purse," Burr says. Snap!

8.36pm GMT

Senator Jay Rockefeller, Democrat of West Virginia, is talking about a 6,000-page report produced by the committee about CIA rendition and torture during the Bush years. The report concluded that the program did not produce valuable intelligence.

Rockefeller is not shy about how good he thinks the report is: "It's a magnificent piece of work, I think it will go down in history," he says.

Rockefeller says it's disturbing that Brennan, who once said torture "saved lives," was surprised by the report's findings.

The senator asks Brennan if he will make the report required reading for senior personnel.

Brennan very diplomatically replies: "I am looking forward to taking advantage of whatever lessons come out of this chapter of history, and this committee's report."

Brennan hedges view that torture brought intelligence

"I never believe it's better to kill a terrorist, than to detain him," Brennan says. "We want to detain as many terrorists as possible, so we can interrogate them..."

Brennan said he previously "had the impression that there was valuable intelligence" from torture, but now he has "serious questions about information that I was given at the time.... the impression that I had at the time... now I have to determine what the truth is, and at this point in time I do not know what the truth is."

Updated at 8.37pm GMT

8.24pm GMT

Chambliss asks Brennan whether he objected to the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, which the committee calls EITs and most people call torture.

Brennan says he expressed his objections in "a number of conversations... with colleagues," Brennan said.

Chambliss asks Brennan about reports that he had oversight of the development of techniques used on Abu Zubaydah, the Saudi militant captured in Pakistan in 2002 and currently held in Guantanamo.

Brennan denies he had anything to do with devising how Abu Zubaydah was interrogated.

8.24pm GMT

Protest pictures

Anti-drone protesters hold signs before the start of the Senate intelligence committee hearing on the nomination of John Brennan as CIA director. Photograph: Michael Reynolds/EPA

Police remove an anti-war protester as John Brennan, US President Barack Obama's pick to lead the CIA, arrives to testify before a full committee hearing on his nomination to be CIA director. Photograph: Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images

Updated at 8.28pm GMT

8.18pm GMT

Drone strikes: Feinstein asks Brennan how he sees his role as CIA director.

She's trying to get a sense of whether the drones program would be a bigger part of the CIA shop under Brennan.

Brennan dodges the questions, saying the president "has insisted that any actions we take will be legally grounded, will be thoroughly anchored in intelligence..." He doesn't address the jurisdiction question.

8.15pm GMT

Feinstein is up.

She says Congressional staff have been banned from seeing the OLC memo laying out the justification for targeted killing of US citizens abroad.

Brennan says it's necessary to keep certain documents in a closed circle but it's possible they will be made available to staff.

Feinstein says the staff has asked for eight additional opinions from the OLC. Brennan says he would be an advocate for the committee to "have the documentation that it needs" to perform its oversight role.

Updated at 8.15pm GMT

8.10pm GMT

Brennan explains to the senators how important they are to the work of the CIA, in their oversight role. Flattery gets you everywhere.

He says that, if confirmed, he will "keep this committee fully informed not only because it is required by law... but because you cannot perform your function... if you are kept in the dark."

Brennan says it will be one of his "highest priorities" to review with Congress a report on the CIA's rendition, detention and interrogation program and the use of "now-banned techniques." Brennan calls these "very serious issues."

"I publicly acknowledge [the fight against al-Qaida] has sometimes involved the use of force outside the hot battlefield of Afghanistan," he says.

He completes his opening statement.

8.04pm GMT

My colleague Adam Gabbatt turns on the TV to catch the Brennan hearing... and has to channel-surf to find it:

The Senate hearing to appoint Brennan is apparently not interesting enough for some news channels. While MSNBC and Fox News carried the hearing live, CNN ignored it to focus on a news conference about the ex-police officer suspected of shooting dead former colleagues in California.

Even as protesters were being ejected from the Senate hearing CNN stayed with the California press conference. Police named Christopher Jordan Dorner as a suspect in a double killing on Sunday, and he is suspected of shooting three officers this morning.

7.57pm GMT

The hearing proceeds.

"As I appear before you today, I especially would like to extend a special salute to David Petraeus," Brennan says. He then thanks Morrell and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

"Jim is a person of longstanding and deep experience and integrity," Brennan says.

Feinstein clears the room

"The next time, we're going to clear the chamber, and bring people back one by one," Feinstein says.

Another protester immediately begins shouting.

Feinstein clears the room. Hearing is recessed.

Updated at 7.52pm GMT

7.50pm GMT

Brennan starts speaking and is immediately shouted down. A protester is removed.

Feinstein issues warning No. 2:

"I'm going to say once again, that we welcome everyone here, that we ...expect no hissing, that we expect no demonstration in this room. This is a very serious hearing. I will stop the hearing, and I will ask for the room to be cleared."

Now another protester.

"Would you pause Mr. Brennan?" Feinstein says. "If you would remove that individual if you please, as quickly as you can."

Protesters greet John O Brennan as he arrives for his confirmation hearing to be CIA director. Photograph: SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Updated at 7.44pm GMT

7.41pm GMT

Vice chairman Saxby Chambliss, the retiring Republican senator from Georgia, reads his statement. He thanks Michael J. Morrell, the acting director of the Central Intelligence Agency since the resignation of Gen. David Petraeus last year in a scandal over an affair with his biographer.

7.39pm GMT

Feinstein seeks to assuage concerns that the drone program is being run without oversight. She says her committee has conducted "significant oversight of the government's conduct of targeted strikes ..."

Feinstein says she can "confirm that the number of civilian casualties that have resulted from such strikes each year has typically been in the single digits."

That clashes with the BIJ count in Pakistan, 475-891 civilians dead; in Yemen, with 72-178 dead; and in Somalia, with 11-57 civilians killed.

7.33pm GMT

Select Committee on Intelligence chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, is making an opening statement.

Protesters catcalled Brennan when he entered the room. She warned them to be quiet.

Charlie Savage (@charlie_savage)

Feinstein chastizes audience to be respectful. "What we will do is remove you from the room. Let there be no doubt."

America's drone program

Although the first drone strike, in Yemen in November 2002, was carried out by the Pentagon, the drone program now is run out of the White House, where Brennan, the president's most trusted counter-terror adviser, helps Obama pick the targets.

The drone program has killed at least 3,000 people in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia over its 10-year existence. The program has been vastly expanded under President Obama. There were 5 confirmed drone strikes in Pakistan in 2007. There were 128 in 2010.

America's drone strikes, as charted by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism Photograph: BIJ

There's no government website that tracks the drone program. News organizations and think tanks that wish to do so rely on local and international news reports.

The Washington Post keeps an easy-to-read tracker, based on data provided by Foundation for Defense of Democracies' Long War Journal and New America Foundation's Counterterrorism Strategy Initiative.

The strike counts differ. The Post counts 347 drone strikes in Pakistan since 2004, for example, while the BIJ counts 362. The Post tally of strikes in Yemen and Somalia since 2002, 55, falls within the BIJ range, 45-61.

The BIJ tallies civilian deaths and deaths of children from drone strikes. In Pakistan, between 475-891 civilians have died in US drone strikes since 2004, according to the bureau's count. In Yemen the range is 72-178, and in Somalia it is 11-57. The web site The Long War counts 64 strikes in Yemen since 2002, with 82 civilian deaths.

Brennan says civilian deaths "are exceedingly rare, and much rarer than many allege."

A joint Stanford University-NYU project called Living Under Drones documents what life is like in the drone zone:

Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles, and public spaces without warning. Their presence terrorizes men, women, and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities. Those living under drones have to face the constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves. These fears have affected behavior.

Last December, @dronestream began tweeting the record of every known US drone strike:

Dronestream (@dronestream)

Jun 15, 2011: 5 civilians -- a taxi driver, two students, a pharmacist, and a shopkeeper -- killed in a car (Pakistan) livingunderdrones.org/report/

Drone strikes better than bombs and artillery, Brennan says

The Guardian's Chris McGreal digs into answers Brennan gave to a committee questionnaire in advance of today's hearing:

In written answers to questions prepared by the Senate intelligence committee, Brennan defended drone strikes as a more humane form of warfare. He said that "extraordinary care" is taken to ensure they conform to the "law of war principles" — a phrase human rights groups say is notable in that it does not claim to actually adhere to international law.

Brennan said drones are better than bombs and artillery. "They dramatically reduce the danger to US personnel and to innocent civilians, especially considered against massive ordnance that can cause injury and death far beyond the intended target," he said.

Brennan acknowledged that there have been "instances when, regrettably and despite our best efforts, civilians have been killed."

But he added: "It is exceedingly rare, and much rarer than many allege".

We'll take a look at the drone program, its targets, its victims, its expansion under President Obama and more in a separate post.

Updated at 6.53pm GMT

6.19pm GMT

Good afternoon and welcome to our live blog coverage of the Senate hearing to confirm John O Brennan, the president's pick to lead the CIA.

It's not every day that senators get to ask one of the nation's top spies about all the country's darkest secrets. Brennan's testimony theoretically represents a rare chance to learn more about drone killing, warrantless wiretapping, torture, rendition, foreign meddling and other odd cloak-and-daggery. That's not to say Brennan, a career CIA man, is going to spill anything of substance.

Brennan's appearance represents a major showdown in the long battle between the secretive Obama administration and advocates for government transparency. The president has made a devilishly potent opening gambit, announcing the release to Congress, after years of refusal to do so, of the official memo laying out the legal case for the drone assassination of US citizens abroad. The administration's intransigence on the matter has been very alarming for those without perfect trust in the wisdom of the White House; as Senator Ron Wyden put it Tuesday, "Every American has the right to know when their government believes it is allowed to kill them." Wyden is on the committee questioning Brennan today, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald)

The Nobel Peace Prize Committee should frame a copy of the DOJ assassination white paper and then hang it on its wall. #DroneLaureate

Apart from secret memos, there's a lot to ask Brennan about. Brennan ran the national counter-terrorism center under President George W. Bush, at a time when the CIA was snatching innocent travelers at airports, flying them to Syria and beating them with cables; at a time when the NSA began harvesting trillions of communications between US citizens without warrants and without their knowledge (an ongoing effort); and at a time when the intelligence services were helping to make the case that lured the United States into Iraq. Brennan was a critic of the Iraq war and he has spoken out against waterboarding. But in his career and in his reasoning, when the practice of rendition has come up against the Geneva conventions, or when warrantless wiretapping has come up against the fourth amendment, one side seems consistently to have won out.

•Also up for examination today: Would Brennan keep the CIA as a spy organization, or make it into a shadow military force? Critics say the agency should stick to its traditional role of gathering and analyzing intelligence and stay out of the drone assassination game (the CIA currently carries out drone strikes where the Defense Department cannot, for reasons of secrecy or international law). The Washington Post has reported that Brennan wants to move the drones program wholly over to the Pentagon. Others doubt that he would voluntarily surrender the power and suspect he would in fact complete the transformation of the CIA into a paramilitary organization.

• Here's the white paper describing the rules of the game for drone assassination (the paper summarizes the arguments in the Office of Legal Counsel memo released late Wednesday). Here are Brennan's answers to prehearing questions. This story is a good primer on Brennan's life and career.

Blake Hounshell (@blakehounshell)

Spoiler: John Brennan is probably not going to answer your questions today.